Yeah even if there was civil war, there wouldn't be any lines on a map. It would be a insurgency nightmare with nobody truly knowing what side people are on and thats not counting foreign actors who will take advantage of the chaos.

I was a Marine on embassy duty during the civil war in Angola and during the DROC elections of 2002-03. And was stationed in Jakarta Indonesian the following year. I have to say that an American civil war would be an absolute nightmare in reality. The average American doesn't truly understand what war is, especially if you have to fear your neighbor and don't have clear sides. Also, domestic terrorism would wreck your psyche a lot more than your body. I think there is time to turn around, but anything will help to prevent this horror show.

I missed the part where a win condition was actually clarified.

I laughed out loud when you said "They'll be welcomed as Heroes and Liberators" That trick Never works!

It's sad how much it feels people seemingly WANT a civil war, without realizing how horrifically bad of an idea that is

Not Vietnam. Not Afghanistan. Yugoslavia...

Truth is neither side would want to be away from screen time or junk food long enough to fight any war. America is already dead. Left vs right is merely a distraction. The government is owned and operated as a front for multinationals and global corporations.

Who the hell does this guy think controls the food?

I don't care who wins, I just hope both teams have fun.

Lets be honest American armed forces are Loyal to America not just a singular party if a civil war happens whomever starts the conflict will be the loser

Wisconsin is far from Left Loyal! Milwaukee and Madison might be ..but the other 95% of the state is NOT

Civil war may be unlikely, but what could actually happen is something like the collapse of rome.

The simple answer is there would be no winners.

So when are you and whatifalthist gonna debate this topic?

Its amazing that people still do the doom and gloom end of the world chaos 😂 just like every single election in all American history

"A domestic insurgency could not stand a chance against the strongest military on the planet" yet historically major power militaries have lost against insurgency. US v Taliban (Afghanistan), US v Al Qaeda (Iraq), Russia v Taliban, US v Viet Cong, British Empire v 13 little North AmericanColonies, etc.

We’ve reached a point where there is no compromise on a lot of political issues. Abortion, guns, immigration etc. the goals are so far apart there is no middle ground.

12:42 In the army, most in combat arms lean conservative while those in support roles ie: Signal Corps, lean progressive. At least from my actual experience serving in the Army for 24 years and going from Artillery to SATCOM.

The electrical grid is held up by 120 million rickety wooden poles in a land with 10 million chainsaws . This is the new dark ages for everyone .

If half the country simply says piss off theres nothing they can do about it.

Those who wish to be left alone will always lose against those determined to win.

To be honest I hate thinking about it. And the shitty movie about it that came out about this topic doesn’t help. Also with ur Afghanistan and Vietnam examples and the vets I’ve talked to about their experiences in those conflicts the Afghanistan war vets genuinely believe that we should’ve withdrawn from Afghanistan after we killed bin Laden thus avenging those who died in the 9/11 attacks. As with the Vietnam vets while they don’t blame the military but the politics which surrounded the war

This video and the bulk of the comments clearly show a lack of understanding in regard to military tactics . You also dont understand how easy it is to bring a high-tech country to its knees. Those of you who live in any city, starting right now, if you couldn't leave your home, how long could you survive? The estimated average is 5 days. If you dont have the ability to last a minimum of 90 days, the chances of your surviving drop to less than 10%. This is a government estimate. You must have shelter, a clean water supply, food, sanitation, and the abilities to defend the area 90 days is reasonable as the bulk of the population won't last more than 30 (why do you think government bunkers are set for 90 days) This horific event can be initiated in any city by ONE person. War is only one thing, wrong. This is not a video game. Millions of innocent people will perish. Ask yourself, why?

The "Right," would not try to conquer the whole country. That's just stupid. They would defend their own territory/region. You can't compare Jan. 6th to a civil war, if the U.S. Military attacked states, those members from those would leave. For the most part. And those who see that action against states may do the same or refuse to participate in an illegal action. Best case scenario is to Secede and keep a temporary defense treaty and gradually separate institutions.

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." - George W. Bush

Dude; the "foreign" interest are already spending billions to "support" the cause of "isms". Destabilization is the goal and they are winning.

I write this as more of an appeal to one problem. What is not being considered here is that perhaps this war doesn't start because of political divides, but rather from an overreaching government. I am more an independent as far as political beliefs and all I see from either party is nothing more than corrupted officials after their own power. So my question is what would happen in the event of this being a scenario that isnt being considered. A fed up people against their overreaching government. A government that is wrongfully locking good people up, a government that is breaking its own laws of due process and free speech, a government that is violating the very principles upon which it was founded, a government that is doing all this in broad daylight. What then, pray tell, is the result of such a conflict? One that is not fought for ideology, but rather for the very thing that this country was founded on. Freedom for the individual. A government that derives its power from the people. A government that fears its people. What is the result of this conflict?

You put to much into the religious aspect. I think most Christians wouldn't care about ehat specific denomination they are.

This is the angriest I’ve ever heard Mr Z… it caught me off guard

As some one in law enforcement I can tell you in event of an actual insurrection or civil war cities will be utter chaos we can barley hold control now. iam in Los Angeles and with any minor event we would need the immediate intervention and assistance of federal law enforcement and resources. Now imaging that problem nationwide you have far to much confidence in the abilities and competency of the government. I am not saying this opens the door for either side to win politics aside LA alone would have major supply chain issues if we just lost the 15 freeway. With the left tearing up cities and the right insurgencies I see no clear winner and the idea that the military wouldn't fragment like every civil war in history is absurd no one side will control the full military it will split. And last but not least gangs and criminal organizations don't give a shit about right or left they will run the cities the pretty much already do we won't be able to hold order in all the chaos.

What I see is a layout for a legitimate psyop

How much glue was huffed before invoking one of the longest continuous coastlines in the world to be "landlocked"????

At one point in the video the narrator says most military members have careers and families and this will tend to deter them from supporting an uprising. What I don’t think he considers is how few men below thirty are even in a relationship now much less one that will foster the creation of a family. I think that sense of hopelessness is what could drive young disenfranchised men to rebel in large numbers.

Holy crap did I see correctly how like 1/3 of the armed forces votes for a third party? That's interesting!

It is also good to point out that liberals are also highly factionized and each faction is also equally distrustful of each other. What would actually happen is akin to the warlord period in early Chinese history. Ending ultimately in the US collapsing into smaller states like Austria-Hungry after WW1. Except this split being a combo of factional self isolation and foreign invovlement.

Not to sound like a communist but the possibility of a civil war may be predicated on the division based on class not politics. As things are moving we see right and left working class recognizing the fact that neo liberalism is driven by the 1% against the working class

Given the truly horrific crimes that were committed during the French and Indian War, the Revolutionary War, the Civil War and the western Indian wars, anyone Right or Left who thinks that they're going to get out of another war unscathed is ignorant of history and flat out delusional.

Throughout this video I had to gradually keep turning down the volume. You're so passionate in the 1st half of the video that your voice gradually rises throughout the video. You put a lot of thought into this video and it shows, good work.

I'll give you the right is lacking on taking action politically. Their are to many rhinos in the party.

In a civil war, its not the regular military that is most concerning. The regular service men and women are not super radical about left or right. Its the armed federal agencies that any rebel faction would have to focus on.

I think the biggest mistake one could make is presuming a conflict would be right vs left, it would imo look more like neighborhood vs neighborhood

FYI New Mexico is only "left leaning", in the city. The rest of New Mexico is Rep. Especially the southern towns, closer to Texas. We literally have a law that says something about, 3 consecutive counties or cities seceeding, and even possibly joining Texas if they're cool with it. Many counties through out the state are turning against Albq and Santa Fe. Especially because they hold funds and refuse to use them on other towns. So nah, besides Albq, the majority would fight for the right.

I desperately wish to be left alone. Authoritarianism is a blight that somehow keeps being permitted to permeate our society. Really just so fucking tired now.

Also, the Civil War movie isn’t right versus left. It’s a dictatorship versus the American people.

It's sad, and kind of scary, how much people wrap their identity around being "right" or "left".

19:24, you make a good point. Catholics, orthodox, Lutherans, anglicans, and Presbyterians, would probably side with each other against baptists, non-denominationals, Methodists, and Pentecostals

When people want to fight, the most basic factor is who can supply themselves with a clean uncorruptable pottable water supply and who can not. Destruction of a water supply shutters a social system.

Whatifalthist is quaking in his boots rn

I don't anticipate a civil war along the lines of 1861-1865, but rather acts of terror performed by either lone actors or small cells. The 19th century lacked the electronic warfare and intelligence apparatuses that currently exist. For example, even during the Civil Rights movement of the '60s and '70s, it was joked that during any meeting of three activists, that one was a police informant, and another was in the employment of the FBI. The same holds true today, any serious group has already been infiltrated. Also, keep in mind that any form of electronic communication would be monitored.

bias mindset that loosely understands history and military tactics and resource control

Arkansas can cripple the ENTIRE US by itself! Headquarters of Walmart! Whatever side they're on is gonna win😂

I think that really big deciding factors for who might win, are who starts it, and who is in a leadership position at the time.

Democratic politicians: "I hate you!" Republican politicians: "I hate you too!" DP: "Anyway wanna get some coffee?" RP: "Sure" Edit: I don't want political comments, so here's a cornbread recipe to distract you Ingredients: 1 cup of all-purpose flour 1 cup of cornmeal (you can also use fine-ground cornmeal) 3 tablespoons of sugar (optional) 2 teaspoons of baking powder 1 teaspoon of kosher salt 1/4 cup of vegetable oil 1 whole egg (beaten) 1 cup of milk Instructions: Preheat your oven to 400 degrees F (200 degrees C). Grease an 8x8 inch baking dish. In a large mixing bowl, whisk together the flour, cornmeal, sugar, baking powder, and salt. Make a well in the middle of the dry ingredients and add in the vegetable oil, egg, and milk. Mix well with a wooden spoon until the batter is smooth and consistent. Pour the batter into the greased baking dish. Bake for 20 to 25 minutes, or until a toothpick inserted in the center comes out clean.

The civil war could also resemble intense insurgency rather than open conflicts. In this situation, the american military would have a much harder time.

Everyone loses in war.

It's usually the most radical faction that wins civil wars. The Soviet's won their civil war because they were so hellbent on dissolving and erasing Russian society/history that they just straight up shot everyone they came across that wasn't on their side. The downfall of American Conservativism is that it's too passive and hesitant to do anything. We Conserve. That's it. We don't conquer like the Left does, so any civil war scenario would have us be on the defensive and it would only be a matter of time before we lose. The only thing that could change that is International support, but I don't foresee many of our Allies not supporting the Federal Government in fear of post-war retaliation. Edit: I'm like 5 minutes in and MZ already said everything I did lmfao

Instead of experiencing a civil war I think America is heading towards a raw livid experience. People have never been this rude yet entitled before.

One of the things about right-wingers who claim to be Christian nationalist that want the USA to be a “Christian Nation” is that they don’t understand the fact that not every American citizen subscribes to Christianity. Keep in mind that it isn’t just Abrahamic religions we’re talking about like Islam and Judaism here. We’re also talking about people who follow Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, Chinese religions and there are even a handful of Americans who follow European paganism as well. There are those who don’t follow any religion like atheists or are neutral to it like agnostics are. The United States isn’t like England, France or especially the Middle East. The founding fathers understood the dangers of such things and wanted to make sure that never happened in the states.

Im a bit curious to see how what your opinion is on the channel whatifatlhist

I agree that many on the Right is far too confident and hasn’t fully thought through the consequences of war. However, there are a few points you haven’t taken into consideration: 1) You don’t take into account how a Second Civil War would affect the global economy. The war would extremely weaken or even crash the US dollar. Since nearly all currencies around the world are pegged to the USD, the war would cause a global depression, particularly if the war had a dramatic, violent start. The rest of nations of the world would be so concerned with stabilizing their own nations that they wouldn’t be paying much attention to the US. When they finally do create a stable currency not backed by USD and have secured their borders without the American military, why would they bother sending aid to the US which no longer effects them? 2) You wouldn’t have to see mass defection among the military in order for it not to be a threat to the Right. A handful of individuals defecting from any given military unit would effectively neutralize it. A couple members of a battery crew leaving a ship makes it much harder or even impossible for it to fire it’s guns. A mechanic or pilot leaving his airbase would drastically decrease the number of sorties that squadron can fly. A single quartermaster blowing up a supply dump deprives a whole regiment of the fuel, food, and ammo needed to wage war. A lone intelligence officer or radio operator running off with a code book leaves military communications completely compromised. On top of that, each of those positions takes months to train a replacement for. With the military already having recruitment problems, it simply won’t be able to replace or cope with the loss of those handful of men. 3) You seem to think the Left is some united block. It isn’t. Granted, it’s more unified that the right, but it has serious cracks that are only getting worse. The split between the LGBs and Ts, between blacks and immigrants, between Muslims and atheists/liberal Christians, etc. That’s not even taking into account the growing power of the populist left. Should war come and especially if the war drags on for a few years, you’d see these cracks only widen and see the left begin to tear itself apart. All that being said, I agree that we should try to avoid a civil war. Whenever the topic of civil war comes up among my friends, I warn them that it won’t be pleasant and will not be the easy victory they think it is. Reform of existing instructions in the country is hands down the best option.

I’ve dealt with a lot of these attitudes from fellow conservatives. It takes more than guns to win a war. It takes logistics, planning, resources, and leadership.

14:29 I think this is the point at really acted as a turning point for my view on things. I have friends in the military and various things I have heard have made me concerned about that aspect, but I think in large part it was a matter of broader pessimism reinforcing those. On reevaluation of the actual evidence I agree with your point and by extension your broader analysis, thank you

This is a great video for rounding out an offensive strategy, great work

*There is so much wrong with this video that it would be difficult to point it all out without doing a line for line deconstruction while simultaneously giving actual examples on why a Civil War would be justified.* You are making some massive under and over estimates. Plus you've wrongly assumed a direct assault would be the main strategy. You clearly have zero military experience. The rebellion type has to match the vulnerabilities of the target. The government and its institutions are NOT invulnerable, or all powerful. With the right equipment, people, and strategy it could be done. Winning perse isn't necessarily the goal. Suppression of the continuance along a path would suffice. Could give time to re-think our futures.*

11:34 "Britain...continuing the colonial war would take more investment than it cared to waste." As a Brit I have to say this was a bit of an oversight on our part. 😉

Opinions are like assholes everyone has one. This guy is full of it lol

Someones mad😭

Whatifalthist: the right will wim Monsieur Z: the right will lose

As a conservative, I believe you're correct on a lot of points, especially the "Leave us alone" stance. Conservatives don't want violence, but the reason many are peacocking about violent resistance is because administration (usually left, but right wing politicians have been known to assist) is choking them under bureaucracy. The AMISH have openly started supporting conservatism in an effort to push back against hostile regulations, and they rarely get involved in "English" matters. The main reason, I believe, for conservative prepping is because they're imagining a situation like the South African farm attacks especially after, several years ago, rioters were threatening to "come for rural America next".

I think the main issue is: what would the civil war be fought about? Because most of the people I hear talking about it say it as if its a "rural vs urban" conflict. But most of the issues that so deeply divide the left and the right are, lets be honest, stuff that mainly happens in large liberal cities and which barely effect those rural areas. The vast majority of immigrants, for example, move to giant cities (see London). In the 1980s most conservatives living in red states and rural areas wouldnt even notice these things were happening. They only do now because of social media. If some Argentina shit happens with 100% inflation now THAT'S civil war material. But those honestly feel like secondary concerns to most people.

31:50 that map is absurd. The midwest would be red.

True arguments. If one conservative faction went to rebel, other conservatives would be too unwilling to militarily back them. Then that rebellion would fizzle out.

Imagine trying to fight an insurgency that speaks, acts, and looks like you and is at most a 2 day drive away from where your family lives. What a shit show.

As ever, thoughtful and nuanced. Neither of which is currently much seen in discussing US politics. Many thanks.

Special forces aren’t in the purple hair club

I’ve never seen Mr. Z so angry before

Crazy to me how many of these comments talk about the taliban, viet cong, american revolution and civil war as if none of those were mentioned in the video in pretty explicit detail.

Summary of the video (I still recommend watching the whole thing, this is just the gist of a gist of it): 1. The military is too loyal and not conservative enough. 2. Unlike Vietnam or Afghanistan, a massive portion of the Southern U.S. is flat, easily accessible land. The land that is mountainous is much worse for agriculture. 3. The United States is too diverse, specifically the Conservative portion of it, that rebel groups would have massive issues with infighting. 4. Attempting to cut off food and other supplies would just anger true Americans 5. Liberal areas tend to be very densely populated, as it's much harder to ignore people with better ideas than yours in urban areas.

Your calculus does not allow for the more self sufficient States just simply withdraw and deal with each other.

It's good to hear a pessimistic right leaning view for a possible Civil War, but now i'm wondering how would a pessimistic left leaning view about the same topic would look like.

One thing to consider, if shtf war time a fair number of people are going to move. I’d take may family to Texas.

Honestly, good video. I disagree with sone of the things you mentioned but you tend to have me on board with your opinions. I don't really know your political beliefs too much, but you seem to be someone who at least tries to be more aware of both sides and critiques things on terms of practicality over feelings. I think the problem with modern day politics is that we spend too much time online boiling with tension and mistrust towards each other that we see our most radical selves displayed. If we could all just sit down one on one and actually talk things out as people, things would probably be a lot better. We're all people here, and we should all see people as people regardless of race, gender, sex, religion, and especially political affiliation because politics aren't personality.

@monsieurZ sorry but I’m confused in the end, are you saying “the right can’t win” more in a logical sense or “the right can’t win” more like in a moral sense? I just want to make sure I understand correctly. Thanks 🙏.

About the whole "fed" point. The reason conservatives are distrustful is because the administration only wants to stop movements made by conservatives.

A thing that people talking about this topic keep forgetting to mention is that NATO might intervene.

These factions are hundreds of miles from each other i don’t know what either side is thinking as the point you made about the military is valid but what about state military Texas has its own soldiers and is becoming more tired of the federal government daily i don’t think they can deploy their troops or leave the nation but I’m curious what would happen to Montana and Texas both places are very independent and not fans of the federal government

Blue states are not blue states.They're blue cities. The states are usually red

This video is a good example why the "right" needs a vanguard party.

@MonsieurZ This is the same thought train the South Africans had after witnessing the downfall of Rhodesia, Mozambique, Angola, Namibia, and Malawi; You rightfully state that conservatives tend to just run away to states more comfortable when policies become pressing on their ideologies and beliefs but where does one go when there is nowhere left to run? Also seem to wrongfully insinuate that some rightist faction would be the first to strike a blow, referencing, rather indirectly, to January 6th and promote that the ideology of the military falls in line with the establishment because *not the Army* but National Guard weekend warriors were okay with occupying DC. To back up this claim, then reference the current "polling" within the military leans towards the left in presidential election, therefore, are more willing to side with the establishment. The only way this happens is if your insinuation that the right strikes first is true, but January 6th was little more than a riot (which the left had done in the streets mere months before) and there is almost zero hard evidence to suggest that any (name one serious non-federal agent instigated) group of individuals planning on doing something that could constitute an "attack on American civilians" that would turn the country on them. It was also evident throughout the entire video of your emotional bias as a conservative New Yorker, someone who doesn't likely own firearms or have regular access to them, but this truly is a hard line in the sand for many conservative minded people, reference the attempt by the state of Virginia to neuter/strip gun rights away from the state's populace despite controlling the state house and executive branch, which did not become enacted after tens of thousands of armed people peacefully protested in the capitol of Richmond, even going as far to have a majority of the counties and city regions in the commonwealth to declare their support for annulling the bill (which happened). We already have our 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th amendment rights being violated on a daily basis, but a stripping or neutering of the 2nd puts citizens backs to the wall. I believe you really gloss over this as some kind of nothingburger but I have yet to see a single other issue unite conservatives to such a degree (again, it's your bias as a New Yorker, someone who willingly abides by the unconstitutionality of what your state, and city specifically, have stripped from you) and I believe your sentimentality is shared by those of your city and state; this is a stretch to paint what is around you as true for the whole country. Again, the way you were emotionally charged is understandable due to your region and views, but paints glowing holes in how far you have to reach to think this would be the train of events. tl;dr New Yorker has hot takes that his thought process is right and disregards the largest uniting idea of the conservative movement is a nothingburger because he willingly excludes himself from it

I had ancestors that fought on both sides of the first War Between The States. Lucky my ancestors didn't kill each other. The reason the Confederates lost the first Civil War was because initially they weren't trying to win but only repel an invasion. The North had invaded in an attempt to capture Richmond and the Confederate leadership, thereby forcing a quick surrender of the Confederacy. That's why in the South, to this day, it's known as the War of Northern Aggression. The first battle, Bull Run, was a completely unexpected overwhelming win by the Confederates a few miles from the Union's Capitol. People had actually came out to picnic and watch the Confederates get their asses handed to them. However, the Confederates chose not to take advantage of their overwhelming victory by immediately invading the Capitol, capturing Lincoln and other key members of the Union government, to then force a surrender of the North. After failing to take advantage of their chance to win the war, the longer the war went on the more likely the Confederates were going to lose, especially after the Union opted to engage in total warfare. Similarly, a modern Civil War would be devastating to the entire nation, not just one region, in lives, infrastructure, psyches, and all.

For a school project I asked people in my small town if it came to Silver war would they want to be independent or join Canada or Mexico

This is all based on a scenario created in the mind of one man.

I don't think you're getting the reaction of the military quite right. In the event of a right wing uprising, it won't be right leaning soldiers turning their guns on their officers and joining the rebels, it'll be paralysis. You'll just see desertion and people doing their jobs poorly and small acts of vandalism, or even sabotage. You'll see more disciplinary issues like fighting, drunkenness and violent criminal acts. The U.S military is a massive organism that requires a lot of cooperation to function properly. If enough people become disillusioned and leave, or start sandbagging, their operational ability will suffer. We're already seeing this in the current recruiting shortage and the attrition caused by the vaccine mandates. A lot of people, not just active duty service members, but also civilian support personnel, declined to reenlist and left for the private sector over the last few years. Also, while I do agree that the military has been actively discouraging extremist viewpoints within its ranks, you need to remember that the military is something like 80% support personnel, so while the overall distribution may be fairly evenly split, when you break it down to combat vs support, the actual combat personnel skew pretty heavily to the right, and it doesn't matter if you have tanks, jets and drones if you don't have anyone to operate them. They're the so-called "tip of the spear" and if they leave, what you've got is a blunt spear, which isn't super useful. I don't think we'll see a full blown civil war for many of the reasons outlined in the video. Instead I think we'll see massive civil unrest, acts of domestic terrorism and lots and lots of manifestos. If we get too caught up in our own bullshit, we'll start seeing more activity from the other players with an interest in upsetting US hegemony. Eventually the provocations (or alleged provocations) from one or more of these players will manifest as a clearly definable threat (China sinking an aircraft carrier for example) and whoever is in charge will use it as an excuse for us to "put aside our differences" and rally around the flag to face this external threat. We'll trade Civil War 2 for World War 3.

This was fascinating and timely

You' re a pretty funny guy. Dont worry, you will get the country you desire in the end.

So whoever starts the war alienates the military and ends up loosing

The Battle of Athens is the first one where the people said no and won.

Look there was a small blackout when a power substation was shot at last year,

The only people who want to fight in a war are the ones who never actually stepped foot in the battlefield.